Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
replace vs replaceAll 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
replace vs replaceAll
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
replace
"this is it".replace(/ /g, "+");
replaceAll
"this is it".replaceAll(" ", "+");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
replace
replaceAll
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
9 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 YaBrowser/24.7.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Yandex Browser 24 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=618960" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
replace
4.9M/s
replaceAll
4.3M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
replace
4,863,478 Ops/sec
replaceAll
4,263,015 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'd be happy to explain the provided benchmark and its various components. **Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark, called "replace vs replaceAll 2", is designed to compare the performance of two string replacement methods in JavaScript: `replace()` and `replaceAll()`. These methods are used to replace substrings within a given string. **Options Being Compared** In this benchmark, the following options are being compared: 1. **`replace()`**: This method replaces all occurrences of a specified substring (in this case, a space) with another specified value (in this case, "+"). 2. **`replaceAll()```**: This is not actually a standard JavaScript method for string replacement. However, based on the benchmark definition, it appears to be using a custom implementation that mimics the `replaceAll()` behavior of some browsers. **Pros and Cons** 1. **`replace()`** * Pros: + Widely supported across different browsers and environments. + Efficient for simple replacements. * Cons: + Can lead to inefficient string concatenation if not used carefully (as seen in the benchmark definition). 2. **`replaceAll()```** * Since this is a custom implementation, there's no clear pros or cons without more context. **Other Considerations** 1. **String Interpolation**: In both methods, the replaced value is interpolated using the `+` operator. This can lead to issues with string formatting and potential security vulnerabilities if not handled carefully. 2. **Performance Overhead**: The benchmark definition suggests that the replacement operation might be computationally expensive, especially for large strings. **Library/Custom Implementation** In this case, there's no explicit mention of a library or framework being used. However, the use of `replaceAll()` implies that it might be part of a custom implementation or an extension to the standard JavaScript API. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There are no specific mentions of special JavaScript features or syntax in the benchmark definition. **Alternatives** If you're looking for alternatives to this benchmark, here are a few options: 1. **`replace()` vs `replaceWith()```**: This benchmark compares the performance of two string replacement methods that are more commonly used: `replace()` and `replaceWith()`. 2. **String Concatenation Performance**: A benchmark comparing the performance of different string concatenation methods, such as using the "+" operator or other concatenation techniques. 3. **Regex Performance**: A benchmark measuring the performance of regular expressions (regex) for string matching and replacement. Keep in mind that the relevance and applicability of these alternatives depend on your specific use case and requirements.
Related benchmarks
JS Cloning benchmarking
replaceAll vs regex replace native
DTMF: array includes vs regex
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?